Some of these sessions were heated debates on whether Open Access could work. Sometimes there were just crazy ideas like publishing a single figure. Almost always these discussions started with the, usually valid, assumption that we were a fringe element advocating radical change. Fast forward a few years and making research outputs publicly accessible is the mainstream policy position for most funders. That crazy idea of publishing just single figures turned into a startup doing deals with big publishers. The young radicals have turned into entrepreneurs, community leaders, industrial researchers and tenured professors.

So for me this is a chance to reflect, to look back at what has changed, but more importantly to look forward. What does the trajectory of change tell us? What technologies are developing? And perhaps most crucially what are the aspects of our current system that we understand to be core to its value? And how has that changed over the last few years.

The session is an open ended discussion, and is at the end of the meeting so attendees will have absorbed ideas of the technical and social changes that are happening today and debated vigorously what matters about the principles of how and why we communicate research findings. This is our chance to take that and use it to debate what the far future could look like.

From the session outline:

In the early days and incarnations of Science Online we talked a lot about a future for research communication which was not just on the web, but of the web. Looking back now, many of the changes we predicted (or wished for!) have happened, or at least are happening. From our perspective of 2014, with Open Access a reality, dynamic publications appearing, and experiments in pre- and post-publication peer review gathering pace, what can we see if we look not just a few years down the road but far out into the future. What might change? What will probably not change? And how can we extrapolate from the trends we see today into the far future?

What do you think the far future of scholarly communications will look like? What can change? What should change? And what should not change? If your at Science Online I hope to see you there and if not feel free to leave your comments here.

Click for more information on Open Access at PLOS

About PLOS Opens

The PLOS Opens blog provides news and views on the ongoing transformation of research communication. We talk about open access, policy, and approaches to open research. Posts will cover evidence and data, opinions and critical analysis from the PLOS Advocacy Team, other PLOS staff and invited guests.

The PLOS Advocacy Team

Catriona MacCallum studied evolutionary biology at Edinburgh. She joined PLOS in July 2003 as a launch editor of PLOS Biology and was also involved in the development of the Community Journals and PLOS ONE. As part of the advocacy team, she focuses on EU policy. She is also a Consulting Editor on PLOS ONE and a member of the Board of OASPA. On Twitter @catmacOA

Cameron Neylon is a biophysicist who has always worked in interdisciplinary areas and has become a dedicated advocate of open research practice and improved data management. As PLOS Advocacy Director, he plays a key role in shaping the organization's Open Access organizing, educational and outreach activities. As a respected leader in the Open Access movement, he participates in legislative and policy initiatives around the world. Cameron joined PLOS in 2012. On Twitter @CameronNeylon

Donna Okubo joined PLOS in late 2004 and has more than 15 years of non-profit membership and fundraising management experience. As a part of the Advocacy team, she coordinates educational and outreach activities and legislative initiatives with individuals and organizations across the broad Open Access community.